 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Trent Woodruff
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 360
|
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 9:50 pm Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
>On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:34:53 -0000, Chris Bellomy wrote:
>>rich hammett wrote:
>Oh yeah. Sorry.
>REVISED: That accounts for the entire lifetime of people under
>39 years, one month.*
>cb
>*I'm rounding the hours. If that leaves you in the statistical
> dead zone, then maybe you should have picked a better day to
> get borned. Get a haircut and a job, baby hippie!
TMML
--
....I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When
you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I
dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts
Archived from group: rec>sport>football>college |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Trent Woodruff
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 360
|
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 9:55 pm Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
>On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 16:29:12 -0000, Chris Bellomy wrote:
>>Trent Woodruff wrote:
>>>On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 21:08:03 -0800 (PST), Dan Bretta wrote:
>>>>On Feb 19, 10:47 pm, Chris Bellomy wrote:
>>>>> Dan Bretta wrote:
>>>>> I'm pretty ignorant to the who was allied with who in the middle east
>>>>> when I was 16 years old, but I haven't heard very many people defend
>>>>> Reagan's inaction in that instance. Not even from die hard
>>>>> Reaganites.
>>>> Well, Hezbollah was/is a Shia operation funded by the Iranians.
>>>> Reagan was busy negotiating with the Iranians. Do the math.
>>>So he didn't even pull his backdoor dealings with the Iranians after
>>>they funded a hit on the US Marines?
>>>Despicable.
>> Please don't fall for Bellomy's lunacy.
>Well, you can't argue with that!
>OK, Trent, which of the following statements is false?
>1. Hezbollah perpetrated the barracks bombing.
>2. Hezbollah was/is a Shia operation funded by Iran.
>3. Reagan was involved in secret negotiations with Tehran in 1983.
>Feel free to introduce any exculpatory evidence I'm leaving out.
>Thanks.
I find it fascinating how much you KNOW about "Reagan's backdoor
deallings". Combining that with your ability to politically add 2 and
2 to reach a sum of 7 tells me pretty much all I need to know.
--
....I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When
you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I
dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
David V. Loewe, Jr
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 Posts: 109
|
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:15 pm Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:56:57 -0000, rich hammett
wrote:
>Yes. I'm also proud of France because it's illegal to
>rape and murder people in prison there, too!
--
"I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pedantic and that's just as good."
- D Gary Grady |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
J. Hugh Sullivan
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 Posts: 29
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:28 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 16:42:37 -0000, Chris Bellomy
wrote:
>Tom Enright wrote:
>> On Feb 20, 8:59 am, Renata wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Of course, now that the low-interest speculative orgy is over; there's
>>> bound to be a painful unwind of hyper-inflated assets, falling home
>>> prices, tumbling stock markets, increased unemployment, and a
>>> generalized credit-contraction throughout the real economy."
>>> (quoted from an article by Mike Whitney)
>>
>> You forgot to add: ", I hope."
>
>You're so cute when you're desperate.
Being cute should not matter to you unless you need a male prostitute.
Hugh |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Glen Heiman
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 15
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:57 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
"J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote in message@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:27:12 -0600, "Ben Stewart"
> wrote:
>
> >| Maybe he needs to learn that the world did not begin 40 years ago and
> >| that liberals started making loud noises about the time of Viet Nam.
> >| I've forgotten the drug they used to help them do that. So many drugs,
> >| so many liberals, so little time.
> >|
> >| Hugh
> >
> >The drugs of the 60s were used to expand the mind,
>
> If that had worked there would be no liberals today.
TMML!
Heiman
>
> Hugh
> |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rich hammett
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 202
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:01 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
Minun olisi pitänyt tietää, olisi pitänyt tietää,
olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, Edward M. Kennedy:
> "J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote
>> Maybe he needs to learn that the world did not begin 40 years ago and
>> that liberals started making loud noises about the time of Viet Nam.
>> I've forgotten the drug they used to help them do that. So many drugs,
>> so many liberals, so little time.
> So your excuse is that the nurse dropped you on your head?
Only wimps had nurses at their birth
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ He always pictured himself a libertarian, which to my
\ way of thinking means ``I want the liberty to grow rich
/ and you can have the liberty to starve''. It's easy to
\ believe that no one should depend on society for help
/ when you yourself happen not to need such help. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
David V. Loewe, Jr
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 Posts: 109
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:00 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 21:09:21 -0800 (PST), Dan Bretta
wrote:
>On Feb 19, 11:02 pm, E.F. Hokie wrote:
>> "To those who have fought for it,
>> freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
>
>That sigfile....oddly familiar.
>
>Heh.
I believe he has all but said it is him...
--
"I'll leave the anarchists alone since they usually shoot back.
The liberals wring their hands so much that they make easy
moving targets."
- Capt. Pat Carroll, USAF |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
John Rogers
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 152
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:24 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
"Edward M. Kennedy" . we live in a world that has walls,
and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whose gonna do
it? You? You, "Edward M. Kennedy" ?
>"J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote
>
>>>>> Of course, now that the low-interest speculative orgy is over; there's
>>>>> bound to be a painful unwind of hyper-inflated assets, falling home
>>>>> prices, tumbling stock markets, increased unemployment, and a
>>>>> generalized credit-contraction throughout the real economy."
>>>>> (quoted from an article by Mike Whitney)
>>>>
>>>> You forgot to add: ", I hope."
>>>
>>>You're so cute when you're desperate.
>>
>> Being cute should not matter to you unless you need a male prostitute.
>
>Typical Christian hypocrite! Rags on gays but is a closet
>prostitute.
Hugh "played a little clarinet" himself when he was young.
John Rogers
AU Class of 1985
The Al Del Greco of Atlanta
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very
well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive,
we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build
your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a
gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will
follow ours." (General Sir Charles Napier) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Chris Bellomy
Joined: 08 Feb 2008 Posts: 27
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:55 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
David V. Loewe, Jr wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:22:30 -0000, Chris Bellomy
> wrote:
>
>>Glen Heiman wrote:
>>> "Chris Bellomy" wrote:
>>>> J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:
>>>> > On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:45:04 -0000, Chris Bellomy
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>John Rogers wrote:
>
>>>> >>> "What we have learned over this year is that hope is making a
>>>> >>> comeback. It is making a comeback. And let me tell you something --
>>>> >>> FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MY ADULT LIFETIME, I AM REALLY PROUD OF MY
>>>> >>> COUNTRY. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I
>>>> >>> think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see
>>>> >>> our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in
>>>> >>> my frustration and disappointment. I've seen people who are hungry to
>>>> >>> be unified around some basic common issues, and it's made me proud."
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Face it, being proud of this country over the last thirty years
>>>> >>is like being proud of the country in "Idiocracy." Pretty much
>>>> >>exactly like it.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Methinks you should probably put your smelling salts away, nut
>>>> >>up, and clue in a little. Just sayin'.
>>>> >
>>>> > Another thought is that the 30 years you fault coincides with the rise
>>>> > of liberalism since the 50s.
>>>>
>>>> Um, Grand Wizard Sullivan? Liberalism crested in 1964. It's been
>>>> a steady diet of conservative rule ever since. You can kinda, you
>>>> know, check the election results and see that.
>>>
>>> As you wish.
>>> In the 60 years ending with George H. W. Bush's last year in office:
>>
>>Sixty years?!
>
> Do you deny that laws passed long ago are still in effect (though
> modified) and are still affecting how the country is run? Does the
> term Social Security ring *any* bells, Chris?
Yeah, the 13th Amendment still applies, too, but that doesn't
have anything to do with Michelle Obama's lifetime, except of
course that she isn't a slave because of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Chris Bellomy
Joined: 08 Feb 2008 Posts: 27
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:56 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
David V. Loewe, Jr wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 16:41:54 -0000, Chris Bellomy
> wrote:
>
>>Dude, Jack Tripper was living with two hot chicks! OK, one hot
>>chick and a so-so one.
>
> ?
>
> The blondes were hot too...
I thought Janet was... eh.
Young Suzanne Somers was extreme hawt. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
J. Hugh Sullivan
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 Posts: 29
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:53 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 14:28:25 -0500, "Edward M. Kennedy"
wrote:
>"J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote
>
>> Maybe he needs to learn that the world did not begin 40 years ago and
>> that liberals started making loud noises about the time of Viet Nam.
>> I've forgotten the drug they used to help them do that. So many drugs,
>> so many liberals, so little time.
>
>So your excuse is that the nurse dropped you on your head?
>
>--Tedward
At that age it was the hardest thing I had - or now.
Hugh |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
J. Hugh Sullivan
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 Posts: 29
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:55 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:27:12 -0600, "Ben Stewart"
wrote:
>| Maybe he needs to learn that the world did not begin 40 years ago and
>| that liberals started making loud noises about the time of Viet Nam.
>| I've forgotten the drug they used to help them do that. So many drugs,
>| so many liberals, so little time.
>|
>| Hugh
>
>The drugs of the 60s were used to expand the mind,
If that had worked there would be no liberals today.
Hugh |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rich hammett
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 202
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:56 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
Minun olisi pitänyt tietää, olisi pitänyt tietää,
olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, David V. Loewe, Jr:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:55:21 -0000, Chris Bellomy
> wrote:
>>David V. Loewe, Jr wrote:
>>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:22:30 -0000, Chris Bellomy
>>> wrote:
>>>>Glen Heiman wrote:
>>>>> "Chris Bellomy" wrote:
>>>>>> J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:
>>>>>> > On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:45:04 -0000, Chris Bellomy
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> >>John Rogers wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> >>> "What we have learned over this year is that hope is making a
>>>>>> >>> comeback. It is making a comeback. And let me tell you something --
>>>>>> >>> FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MY ADULT LIFETIME, I AM REALLY PROUD OF MY
>>>>>> >>> COUNTRY. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I
>>>>>> >>> think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see
>>>>>> >>> our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in
>>>>>> >>> my frustration and disappointment. I've seen people who are hungry to
>>>>>> >>> be unified around some basic common issues, and it's made me proud."
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>Face it, being proud of this country over the last thirty years
>>>>>> >>is like being proud of the country in "Idiocracy." Pretty much
>>>>>> >>exactly like it.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>Methinks you should probably put your smelling salts away, nut
>>>>>> >>up, and clue in a little. Just sayin'.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Another thought is that the 30 years you fault coincides with the rise
>>>>>> > of liberalism since the 50s.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Um, Grand Wizard Sullivan? Liberalism crested in 1964. It's been
>>>>>> a steady diet of conservative rule ever since. You can kinda, you
>>>>>> know, check the election results and see that.
>>>>>
>>>>> As you wish.
>>>>> In the 60 years ending with George H. W. Bush's last year in office:
>>>>
>>>>Sixty years?!
>>>
>>> Do you deny that laws passed long ago are still in effect (though
>>> modified) and are still affecting how the country is run? Does the
>>> term Social Security ring *any* bells, Chris?
>>
>>Yeah, the 13th Amendment still applies, too, but that doesn't
>>have anything to do with Michelle Obama's lifetime, except of
>>course that she isn't a slave because of it.
> It's a pretty important effect, don't ya think?
Yes. I'm also proud of France because it's illegal to
rape and murder people in prison there, too!
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ He always pictured himself a libertarian, which to my
\ way of thinking means ``I want the liberty to grow rich
/ and you can have the liberty to starve''. It's easy to
\ believe that no one should depend on society for help
/ when you yourself happen not to need such help. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Trent Woodruff
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 360
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:06 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
>On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 04:10:20 -0000, Chris Bellomy wrote:
>>Trent Woodruff wrote:
>>>On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 16:29:12 -0000, Chris Bellomy wrote:
>>>>Trent Woodruff wrote:
>>>>>On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 21:08:03 -0800 (PST), Dan Bretta wrote:
>>>>>>On Feb 19, 10:47 pm, Chris Bellomy wrote:
>>>>>>> Dan Bretta wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm pretty ignorant to the who was allied with who in the middle east
>>>>>>> when I was 16 years old, but I haven't heard very many people defend
>>>>>>> Reagan's inaction in that instance. Not even from die hard
>>>>>>> Reaganites.
>>>>>> Well, Hezbollah was/is a Shia operation funded by the Iranians.
>>>>>> Reagan was busy negotiating with the Iranians. Do the math.
>>>>>So he didn't even pull his backdoor dealings with the Iranians after
>>>>>they funded a hit on the US Marines?
>>>>>Despicable.
>>>> Please don't fall for Bellomy's lunacy.
>>>Well, you can't argue with that!
>>>OK, Trent, which of the following statements is false?
>>>1. Hezbollah perpetrated the barracks bombing.
>>>2. Hezbollah was/is a Shia operation funded by Iran.
>>>3. Reagan was involved in secret negotiations with Tehran in 1983.
>>>Feel free to introduce any exculpatory evidence I'm leaving out.
>>>Thanks.
>> I find it fascinating how much you KNOW about "Reagan's backdoor
>> deallings".
>Iran-Contra ring a bell, Trent? Were you asleep at the time
>or something?
I'm not denying he dealt with the Iranians during that time. However,
I AM saying that it's fascinating how much you KNOW about it.
FASCINATING.
--
....I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When
you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I
dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rich hammett
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 202
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:40 am Post subject: Re: Will Michelle Obama be Barrack's "Bill Clinton" burden? |
|
|
Minun olisi pitänyt tietää, olisi pitänyt tietää,
olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, David V. Loewe, Jr:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:56:57 -0000, rich hammett
> wrote:
>>Yes. I'm also proud of France because it's illegal to
>>rape and murder people in prison there, too!
>
Hey, if you think not having slavery is something to be
proud of, there's lots of stuff to be proud for.
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ He always pictured himself a libertarian, which to my
\ way of thinking means ``I want the liberty to grow rich
/ and you can have the liberty to starve''. It's easy to
\ believe that no one should depend on society for help
/ when you yourself happen not to need such help.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
| Related Topics: | Deer the Clinton campaign It's only plagiarism if you claim to be the original source or otherwise take credit for someone else's work. When you freely acknowledge the source, it ain't plagiarism. Nice try though. (ref:
Why not to vote for Obama The last four letters of his last name is reason enough for me. John Rogers AU Class of 1985 The Al Del Greco of Atlanta "All that remains is the faces and the names Of the wives and the sons and the daughters."
Ping Bill "Frisbee" Dude...and anyone else this might apply Parents of children with special needs, namely autistic, Asperger's, etc. I want to know how many of you have pets. (Primarily dogs, cats...the cuddly kind of pets.) If not, why not? There is a method to my madness...and it's because of my nephew that I
Dalia Lithwick Gores Obama "know it's kind of lame to break up with you on Valentine's Day. And on the Internet to boot. But it's also kind of ironic. And that's what I need to tell you. As an ironic, contrarian, Gen X-er, I just can
Michelle Obama just keeps gettin' better and betterer "Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|